Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
On Thu, 2004-06-17 at 20:00, Paul Vixie wrote: think stability. I think recent events prove pretty well that Verisign GRS no longer gives a crap about stability. Have we forgotten *.COM so quickly? oh please. i was an publically critical of *.COM and *.NET, but that's a policy problem, not an operational problem. verisign has a very good record for name server uptime, both at the TLD and root level. if you're going to complain about their wildcard policies, please be specific. Enough has been said about that, though a concrete list of the cons have never been published (pointers anyone?). The biggest con is simply that .com becomes a normal domain and not a zone which only contains NS records making every domain just a subzone (technically that is it indeed) of the .com. If Verisign wants to own every domain in the .com zone they should register every one of them seperatly and pay the registration fees to one of the other registrars. It also breaks normal operational usage and the year old assumptions that people can make of it. (note that verisign has amended their complaint against icann (since the court dismissed the first one) and i'm now named as a co-conspirator. if you reply to this message, there's a good chance of your e-mail appearing in court filings at some point.) For that matter I think (and hope) that most people on NANOG will be delighted to stand at your side against this Verisign madness. Greets, Jeroen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
RE: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
He, He! :) - Joel Perez| Network Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.USPGI.com - -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Paul Vixie Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2004 2:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?] think stability. I think recent events prove pretty well that Verisign GRS no longer gives a crap about stability. Have we forgotten *.COM so quickly? oh please. i was an publically critical of *.COM and *.NET, but that's a policy problem, not an operational problem. verisign has a very good record for name server uptime, both at the TLD and root level. if you're going to complain about their wildcard policies, please be specific. (note that verisign has amended their complaint against icann (since the court dismissed the first one) and i'm now named as a co-conspirator. if you reply to this message, there's a good chance of your e-mail appearing in court filings at some point.) -- Paul Vixie
Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
On Thu, Jun 17, 2004 at 11:49:20AM -0400, Patrick W Gilmore wrote: On Jun 17, 2004, at 11:37 AM, Matt Levine wrote: I'll still pose the question as a theoretical one... say it was ultradns rather than akadns (..or any substantially large website in traffic having an authoritive DNS attack), would verisign be willing to push changes for somebody 'big' ? should they? The only time I remember that the .com zone was pushed out of window for a customer was one time AOL had a problem with AOL.com. I think they let it expire by accident, not certain. Check the NANOG archives. Other than that, I remember the .com zone being pushed mid-day when there was an error during the over-night push. patrick think stability. --bill
Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
--On Thursday, June 17, 2004 16:07 + [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: think stability. I think recent events prove pretty well that Verisign GRS no longer gives a crap about stability. Have we forgotten *.COM so quickly?
Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
think stability. I think recent events prove pretty well that Verisign GRS no longer gives a crap about stability. Have we forgotten *.COM so quickly? oh please. i was an publically critical of *.COM and *.NET, but that's a policy problem, not an operational problem. verisign has a very good record for name server uptime, both at the TLD and root level. if you're going to complain about their wildcard policies, please be specific. (note that verisign has amended their complaint against icann (since the court dismissed the first one) and i'm now named as a co-conspirator. if you reply to this message, there's a good chance of your e-mail appearing in court filings at some point.) -- Paul Vixie
Re: Pushing GTLD zones [WAS: Akamai DNS Issue?]
On 17 Jun 2004 18:00:02 + Paul Vixie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: (note that verisign has amended their complaint against icann (since the court dismissed the first one) and i'm now named as a co-conspirator. if you reply to this message, there's a good chance of your e-mail appearing in court filings at some point.) Cool. :-) -- D'Arcy J.M. Cain [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Democracy is three wolves http://www.druid.net/darcy/| and a sheep voting on +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082)(eNTP) | what's for dinner.
